Kategorie: Humans

In response to the Tunis Court of Appeal upholding the convictions and prison sentences against 34 defendants to sentences from five to forty-five years in the politically motivated ‘conspiracy case’ on 27 November, Sara Hashash, Deputy Regional Director for the Middle East and North Africa at Amnesty International, said:

“The decision by the Tunis Court of Appeal to hold the unjust convictions in the so-called ‘conspiracy case’ is an appalling indictment of the Tunisian justice system. By validating the guilty verdicts following a sham trial based on unfounded charges against dozens of individuals, including prominent politicians, lawyers, and human rights defenders, the Appeals Court has deliberately ignored the litany of fair trial violations that have plagued this sham case from day one.

“The Court of Appeal has thereby also rubber stamped the government’s use of the justice system to eliminate political dissent. While three of the defendants were acquitted and a few sentences reduced, other sentences were increased – including for Jahouher Ben Mbarek, who has been on hunger strike for 31 days in protest against his arbitrary detention and wrongful trial, had his sentence increased from 18 to 20 years. The court’s decision affirms that participating in peaceful opposition remains a crime punishable by long-term imprisonment in Tunisia.

“The authorities have compromised the integrity of this trial from the outset through repeated violations of due process, including the courts’ unjustified decision to deprive detained defendants of their right to be present in the court room and insist on holding the trial remotely. Combined with the state’s continued targeting of lawyers representing defendants in the case, these actions expose a relentless campaign to erode rights and silence dissent.

“We are deeply alarmed that political activists Chaima Issa and Ahmed Nejib Chebbi and human rights defender Ayachi Hammami now face an imminent and arbitrary risk of arrest after the appeal court confirmed their convictions and sentenced them to 20, 12 and 5 years respectively.

“The Tunisian authorities must immediately quash the unjust convictions and sentences against all defendants in the ‘conspiracy case’. They must immediately and unconditionally release all those detained solely for exercising their human rights and cease the relentless, politically motivated persecution of critics, opponents, and legal professionals. So long as the judiciary provides no check on government repression, it emboldens growing authoritarianism and a full-blown human rights crisis.”

Background

The ‘conspiracy case’ in Tunisia involves the prosecution of 37 opposition figures, lawyers, and activists on severe, politically motivated charges, primarily “conspiracy against state security.” In April 2025, the Tunis Court of First Instance handed down harsh prison terms, ranging from four to 66 years, following a trial widely condemned for its grave fair trial violations, lack of transparency and executive interference.

On 24 October, defense lawyers learned that the initial appeals hearing had been scheduled for 27 October and would be held remotely via video conference for the 12 defendants in detention based on the court’s decision to hold all terrorism trials remotely since April 2024, citing “imminent danger” without justification. The detained defendants were notified only on the day of the hearing, while the others received no summons. On 27 October, the hearing was postponed until 17 November and then until 27 November.

The requirement for detained defendants to participate remotely, despite their objections, denied them the right to be physically present in court, in violation of their defense rights. 

Among the 34 individuals sentenced in this trial, six opposition political figures – Khayyam Turki (sentenced to 35 years) Jaouhar Ben Mbarek, Issam Chebbi, Ghazi Chaouachi, Ridha Belhaj (20 years) and Abdelhamid Jelassi (10 years)– have been held in arbitrary detention since the investigation began in February 2023. 

Other defendants sentenced in this case include several individuals who had been in detention in relation to other politically motivated cases, such as senior opposition figures Noureddine Bhiri (20 years), Sahbi Atig (10 years), and Said Ferjani (10 years) from the former ruling Ennahdha party. The case also targeted 20 individuals living abroad, including prominent human rights defender Bochra Bel Haj Hmida, who was sentenced to 33 years in prison.

The post Tunisia: Quash unjust heavy convictions in ‘conspiracy case’  appeared first on Amnesty International.

In response to today’s Tokyo High Court decision that endorsed the Japanese government ban on same-sex marriage, Amnesty International’s East Asia Researcher Boram Jang said:

“The court’s decision today marks a significant step backwards for marriage equality in Japan. The ruling in Tokyo – the final high court ruling of six lawsuits filed across the country and the only ruling to say, in effect, that discrimination against same-sex couples is constitutional – cannot be allowed to hamper progress. But it should serve as a warning of the reluctance to acknowledge the concept of same-sex marriage and the reality of same-sex couples living in Japan.

“While these cases work their way to the Supreme Court, the government can resolve this issue through legislation without further delay. The Japanese government needs to be proactive in moving towards the legalisation of same-sex marriage so that couples can fully enjoy the same marriage rights as their heterosexual counterparts.   

“Japan remains the only G7 country without legal recognition for same-sex couples. The law passed by the government in 2023 to promote understanding of LGBTI people is not enough. There need to be solid, legal measures in place to protect same-sex couples and the LGBTI community in Japan from all forms of discrimination.”

Background

On 28 November 2025, Tokyo High Court ruled in favour of Japan’s ban on same-sex marriage outlining that the ban does not violate Article 24(1) and (2) and Article 14 (1) of the Constitution. However, Presiding Judge Yumi Tōa stated that if the current situation continues, “it is inevitable that constitutional violations will arise” and that “the issue should first be thoroughly deliberated in the Diet.”

This decision marks the last high court ruling of six lawsuits filed.

In 2019, five lawsuits were filed in Tokyo, Osaka, Nagoya, Sapporo and Fukuoka with an additional lawsuit filed in Tokyo in 2021.

Sapporo High Court was the first high court to hand down a decision on the issue. In March 2024, the court ruled that the provisions of the Civil Code and the Family Register Act that do not recognize same-sex marriage are unconstitutional, as they violate Article 24(1) and (2) and Article 14 (1) of the Constitution. 

Other high court decisions followed with Tokyo High Court finding that the same-sex marriage ban violated Article 24(2) and Article 14(1) of the Constitution in October 2024. Shortly after in December 2024, Fukuoka High Court came to a similar decision but also outlined a violation of Article 13 of the Constitution which details the right to pursue happiness.

In March 2025, both Nagoya High Court and Osaka High Court ruled the ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional as it violated Article 24(2) and Article 14(1) of the Constitution.

With all high court decisions made, the cases await a Supreme Court ruling.

The post Japan: Last high court ruling a damaging step backwards on same-sex marriage appeared first on Amnesty International.

Two years ago, a group of activists known as Scientist Rebellion blocked road and river traffic in Le Havre, Northern France, to oppose a new floating liquefied natural gas terminal.

Some activists locked themselves to the barriers on either side of the road, while others glued themselves to the asphalt. Police arrested them a few hours later and placed them in pre-charge detention for 24 hours.

Libre* is one of the 16 activists who took part in the protest. Each activist received a €200 criminal fine for blocking traffic, however they all chose to oppose and stood trial before the Havre First Instance Court, stating their acts were protected by freedom of expression. Two years later, on 10 February 2025, the Court acquitted the activists.

Libre’s case features in a new briefing developed by Amnesty International, APCOF and Suaram together with the Campaign to Decriminalize Poverty, Status and Activism “Dissent on Trial: Strategies to Counter Rising Criminalization of Activism”, which shares strategies activists, lawyers and civil society organizations can pursue to challenge the criminalization of various forms of activism including civil disobedience.

In this story, Libre reveals what inspired her activism, and why she’s hoping her engagement will lead to changes.

*Name has been changed to for security purposes

I’ve been aware of the effects of climate change since I was young. My parents used to find little notes I’d written such as “be careful with water” or “watch your waste”. It was a gradual journey, where I started taking small actions at home such as making posters for my parents, before trying to implement eco-friendly ideas in my classroom.

After that, I joined youth climate marches and organized scout projects, where we would pick up trash on beaches. However, I started to realise that youth climate marches weren’t as effective as I’d hoped, so I decided to turn to civil disobedience, hoping it makes a difference.

As part of Extinction Rebellion, I currently campaign on climate and environmental issues, taking on companies responsible for the climate and social crisis harming people, whose lives and lands they exploit.

The dangers of repression

I have faced dangers for taking part in these actions. While I was protesting against a giant water reservoir in  south-western France, it turned extremely violent and I was genuinely afraid for my life. Police were shooting at us with rubber bullets and tear gas was being thrown into the crowds. I’ve also been kettled several times, deprived of access to water or toilets, as well as held in custody, which had a huge psychological impact on me.

Police were shooting at us with rubber bullets and tear gas was being thrown into the crowds

Libre, activist

In many ways, it’s nothing compared to the dangers others face due to climate change and I’m lucky I haven’t yet faced a real threat to my life because of climate disruption. However, when your life is put in danger because of activism, it’s still significant.

Repression is having a huge effect on me and my family. When my home was raided by mistake in connection to another case, my little sister was there. When I’m held in custody or go to court, my parents and partner come, so it’s stressful for them too. I’ve suffered nightmares. There are also legal consequences — for example, if I get a record, I can’t work anymore. I also miss workdays for trials, actions, and time in custody. It has affected my ability to travel. The last time I tried to go to England on the Eurostar, I was stopped at the border and questioned. They asked for my papers and why I was going there, because I think I’m flagged — maybe even as a “S file” (a security watchlist).

Climate change and its consequences

Sometimes, I feel like I am in a constant state of stress about the cause itself — climate change and its consequences — because I see that despite everything we do, very little changes.

Personally, I haven’t yet experienced the direct impacts of climate change, at least nothing beyond heatwaves. But I’ve witnessed small things.

For example, I think my grandparents’ house is collapsing due to global warming, especially because of soil issues. I also have a friend in Madagascar, who has experienced massive cyclones. It’s hard, as they’re not the ones causing climate change, yet they’re the first to suffer from it.

What we’re doing is for everyone

I wish authorities would realize that we’re not against them. We’re also doing it for them. We don’t want their children to suffer from climate change. It doesn’t bring us money or any personal benefit. It’s not for personal gain — it’s for all living beings. Everyone has a stake in this. By silencing the scientists and stopping us from taking action, authorities are putting themselves on the wrong side of history.

I wish authorities would realize that we’re not against them. We’re also doing it for them.

Libre, activist

We show our humanity when we’re able to see each other as equals, with respect and kindness for everyone, and when we act knowing that what we do has a positive impact on humanity and on all living beings.

My commitment is having an impact

Despite everything, I try and remain hopeful – especially when we manage to carry out actions that make sense, that speak to people. I also remind myself that small initiatives are taking place everywhere. And I tell myself that even if we don’t succeed, at least I’ll have done my part. I’ll be able to say to my children, and myself, I did what I could. That’s what keeps me going.

I know my work is having an impact. I’ve already had an impact on my loved ones by helping them understand the situation, as well as realize what state our rule of law is really in. Through the harsh repression we face as activists, my friends and family can see what that says about our democracy.

Then there’s the impact of our actions. Perhaps it feels small compared to what they cost us, but there is impact. We’ve seen results. And our actions make people think or at least force them to ask themselves questions. To me, that’s what matters.

The post Libre: “I’ve been held in custody and prosecuted for blocking traffic” appeared first on Amnesty International.

The Algerian authorities must immediately drop charges against prominent Hirak activist and poet Mohamed Tadjadit and 12 other activists who face state security charges punishable with long terms of imprisonment, or even possibly the death penalty, for exercising their human rights, Amnesty International said ahead of the start of their trial on 30 November. The organization is calling on the authorities to immediately and unconditionally release all activists who have been detained solely for exercising their right to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. 

It is utterly appalling that activists in Algeria, like Mohamed Tadjadit, are facing heavy prison sentences and even the possible risk of the death penalty, simply because they advocated for political reforms.

Hussein Baoumi, Deputy Regional Director for the Middle East and North Africa.

“It is utterly appalling that activists in Algeria, like Mohamed Tadjadit, are facing heavy prison sentences and even the possible risk of the death penalty, simply because they advocated for political reforms,” said Hussein Baoumi, Deputy Regional Director for the Middle East and North Africa.  

“The Algerian authorities’ misuse of vaguely worded security laws to silence their critics is a grave injustice that must cease. These baseless charges must be dropped, and the activists released immediately and unconditionally.” 

Algeria has not carried out any executions since 1993. However, Algeria is yet to abolish the death penalty and ratify the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Authorities have sentenced people to death, including dissidents following unfair trials in recent years. The imposition of the death penalty after unfair proceedings renders the use of this punishment arbitrary under international law and standards.  

Amnesty International opposes the death penalty unconditionally, in any cases and under any circumstances. 

The trial of the 13 Hirak activists will commence in front of the Dar El Beïda tribunal of first instance in Algiers on 30 November. They are facing state security charges solely based on their peaceful activism advocating for political reforms. 

Unjust prosecution and risk of death sentence for expressing dissent 

The activists are facing charges of “conspiring to incite citizens against the authority of the state and to undermine national unity” (Articles 77 para 1, 78 and 79 of the Penal Code). This criminal charge is punishable by up to 30 years in prison and by the death penalty.  

The public prosecution also accused them of “receiving funds to carry out actions undermining state security or stability (…) as part of a premeditated plan inside or outside the country,” “publishing content harmful to national interest,” and “inciting to unarmed gathering,” respectively under Article 95bis, 95bis 1, 96 and 100 of the Penal Code that together carry penalties of 11 to 30 years’ imprisonment.  

These vaguely and overly-broad criminal provisions, which stipulate heavy penalties, lack legal clarity, directly criminalize the peaceful exercise of human rights, and are open to arbitrary and discretionary application in contravention with international human rights law and standards. In addition, the actions subject to prosecution do not meet the threshold of the “most serious crimes”, interpreted as intentional killing, to which the use of the death penalty must be restricted under international human rights law and standards. 

The public prosecution is solely relying on the activists’ social media posts and private digital communications lamenting socio-economic conditions in the country and supporting Hirak protests as ‘evidence’.  

In some instances, the public prosecution is using online publications for which the defendants have already been previously convicted, thus indicating a violation of the principle of double jeopardy. For example, the prosecution is relying on a video shared by Mohamed Tadjadit and four co-defendants who posted the testimony of a child tortured in police custody, an act for which those five men were previously sentenced to 16 months in prison. 

Mohamed Tadjadit has previously been convicted and sentenced in at least seven separate cases since 2019. On 11 November, he was sentenced to five years in prison in another case for unfounded terrorism-related charges. Multiple defendants among the 13 are also facing multiple sentences related to their peaceful activism in separate cases.

Algeria: Further Information: Activists & poet could face death sentence: Mohamed Tadjadit – Amnesty International

On 30 November 2025, a new trial will commence for activist and poet Mohamed Tadjadit and 12 other activists who all face state security charges punishable by long-term imprisonment and the death p…

“The Algerian authorities’ repeated prosecution of activists simply for expressing dissenting opinions or for participating in peaceful assemblies reveals a deliberate attempt to close the civic space and silence any form of criticism,” said Hussein Baoumi. 

 Algerian authorities must reverse course urgently: free these activists immediately and unconditionally and cease the criminalization of dissent.

Hussein Baoumi

“Algerian authorities must reverse course urgently: free these activists immediately and unconditionally and cease the criminalization of dissent.” 

Background 

Since the outbreak of the “Hirak” protests in 2019, the Algerian authorities have maintained a relentless crackdown on all forms of dissent by arresting, detaining and convicting activists, journalists, and critics expressing opposition to the government’s policies or other opinions critical of the authorities. 

The post Algeria: Authorities must immediately drop charges against Mohamed Tadjadit and 12 Hirak activists appeared first on Amnesty International.

Most factory workers who produce garments for the fashion industry are women. Studies show that women constitute 60-80% of the global garment workforce. This means that when we talk about protecting human rights in the garment and fashion industry, we must also specifically consider the rights of women. Many of the issues facing garment workers, like low wages and precarious employment, disproportionately affect women.  

Gender discrimination is rife in the garment industry. Women face a persistent wage gap, earning less than men for comparable work. They also endure rampant gender-based violence and harassment in the workplace.  

Empowering women workers is crucial for combating gender discrimination. When states and companies suppress labour rights, such as the right to form unions, they not only undermine workers’ rights but also specifically impede women’s ability to advocate for change.  

The garment industry lacks sufficient safeguards for workers, especially women workers. Empowering women workers with greater authority and decision-making opportunities to ensure that new safeguards are designed and implemented based on the genuine, lived experiences of those they aim to protect.  

Who are the workers that make garments for the fashion industry?

The garment industry provides jobs to around 94 million workers globally. Due to high levels of informal employment across the industry, it is hard to determine the precise number and gender makeup. However, the International Labour Organization estimates that between 60-80% of global garment industry workers are women.  

Asia is the largest employer of garment sector workers, accounting for 75% of all workers. Historically, China has long held the top spot for garment production and while it is still the number one producer, recent years have seen rapid industry growth across countries in South Asia.  

Most garment workers in Bangladesh, India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka are internal migrants, predominantly young women. Many of these women moved from rural areas to the city to find employment. Without their families and support networks, they are even more vulnerable to abuse and exploitation.  

Workers with multiple, intersecting identities based on their gender, race, caste, migration status or religion face compounding discrimination.  

Why do women make up most of the workforce in the garment industry?

In many South Asian countries, garment work is seen as an opportunity for women to enter the workforce. Women and girls form the cornerstone of the garment workforce and yet they bear the brunt of its unequal pay and poor working conditions.  

Low minimum wages attract business from rich, powerful fashion brands and distributors who bring in foreign investment. Governments in many developing economies view the garment industry as a pathway to industrialization and growth. However, this economic growth, which disproportionately benefits the richest and most privileged, is often built on the exploitation of poorly paid workers who cannot access some of their most fundamental human rights. 

Those who applaud the garment industry for its role in economic growth cannot ignore how those at the helm of the garment industry, from factory managers to multinational fashion brands, fail to meet their responsibilities to workers, especially women workers.

What is it like to be a garment worker?

Human rights abuses are systemic in the garment industry.  

Workers often endure poverty wages, dangerous working conditions, and precarious employment contracts. Without a living wage they cannot access essentials like food, healthcare, clean water, education, safe housing and other economic, social, and cultural rights.  

Attempts by workers to self-organize or advocate for better conditions are often stamped out by employers and even the state. This suppression of freedoms of expression  and the right to unionize creates a climate of fear and intimidation, hindering workers’ ability to demand justice, accountability and remediation.  

What does gender discrimination look like in the garment industry?

Human rights and labour rights campaigners have highlighted an urgent need to address widespread gender discrimination in the garment industry. Women are paid far less than male workers and lack access to childcare, maternity pay and other benefits.  

Additionally, women workers face a heightened risk of gender-based violence and harassment at work. This is exacerbated by a working culture that often favours men in management positions, despite women constituting most of the workforce.  

Research in India and Bangladesh warns that male managers and supervisors often bully, harass and sexualize the women who work for them. Women from marginalized communities, such as Dalit women in India or Tamil women in Sri Lanka and Christians in Pakistan, are particularly vulnerable to such abuse.  

Harassment and violence are carried out with impunity, which in turn fuels the cycle of abuses against women workers and other marginalized people.  

There is legislation on anti-discrimination, but the problem is that there’s impunity for the perpetrators and no implementation of that legislation. Access to justice is minimal generally for women and this is doubly so with Dalit women. If women report abuse – if they go to a police station for example, then the chances are the police will also abuse them sexually in one way or another. So, cases are very, very rarely reported. 

Meena Varma from the International Dalit Solidarity Network

What needs to change to improve women’s rights in the garment industry?

A rights-based approach to reforming the garment industry must be driven by the voices of women workers themselves.  

Enabling garment workers’ right to organize and unionize is essential. Unions provide a platform for women workers to collectively address concerns about rights abuses, negotiate with employers and advocate for improved working conditions.  

Both governments and companies are responsible for implementing measures that counter gender discrimination and gender-based violence in the workplace and ensure equitable working conditions for all garment workers, including the right to freedom of association. To hold them accountable to those obligations, we need to achieve greater awareness of the human rights abuses against women in garment factories, including impartial reviews of working conditions. By unveiling the truth, we can call out factory owners, employers and states to own up to their human rights and take concrete steps to promote the rights of women garment workers.  

The post Why are workers’ rights in the garment industry a gender discrimination issue? appeared first on Amnesty International.